At-Will Employment

However, the ruling in this case and others like it prove that employers can, in fact, be bound by articles written in an employee handbook when disciplining or discharging an employee. An abysmally written handbook can greatly jeopardize an employer’s right to terminate at will. Trends show that courts are increasingly acknowledging enforceable promises in the past employment practices of firms, in employer handbooks and in oral commitments. In addition to including an at-will disclaimer in employee handbooks, employers should also require employees to sign an acknowledgment confirming that they understand and agree to employment-at-will and that at-will employment can at any time be modified by a written agreement. Personnel manuals should explicitly state that the employer reserves the right to terminate employment at will. All written policies should also be free of any language that could be considered as a guarantee of job security. To be sure that these common pitfalls are avoided employers must retain the service of a labor attorney to draft and air-tight employee manual and acknowledgment

| |How might managers in an organization use knowledge of employment-at-will and its exceptions | | |

On the contrary, employment at will is defended by Richard Epstein in his article “In Defense of the Contract at Will”. He is trying to show that the contract at will “is adopted not because it allows the employer to exploit the employee, but rather because over a very broad range of circumstances it works to the mutual benefit of both parties.” Then I will summarize the benefits of EAW that Epstein provides.

It is no answer that the parties' written contract was for an employment-at-will, where the employer foreseeably and intentionally induces the prospective employee to materially change his position to his expense and detriment, and then repudiates its obligations before the written contract begins to operate.

An employment-at-will doctrine is a common law that states an employer can hire, fire, promote, or demote an employee at anytime for any reason as long as there is a law or doctrine that does not oppose it. As an employer can fire an employee for any reason at any time, likewise an employer can quit a job for any reason at any time. ‘The economic philosophy of laissez-faire provided theoretical support for employment-at-will.” (Ingulli, 2012).

Employment at will is a law that is present in all fifty states in the US; although, in Montana there requires a stated cause for termination. Employment at will creates dissent among employees when they have been terminated for a cause that is thought to be unsubstantial or when no cause is given. There are pros and cons to the presumption, and employees and employers have different views. Employment at will means that the employer can terminate an employee at any time, for any cause without warning. However, even an at-will employee cannot be terminated because of discriminatory reasons. Employment at will also means that an employee can leave a job at any time without the fear of facing any legal consequences. An employer can also

The employment-at-will doctrine states that an employee can be fired or released from a company for cause or no cause at all. The employee also has the right to quit a job for any reason. Under this legislation, neither the employer or employee incurs “adverse legal consequences” (NCSL, 2014). There are three exceptions that are observed by the law to include a dismissal that “violates a state’s public policy, where there is an implied contract for employment, or where there is an implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing” (Muhl, 2001, p4). People cannot be fired based on the “individual’s race, color, religion,

The purpose of this qualitative research study is the identify disparities within the at will employment law. These disparities are increase job loss for employment recovery, unwarranted termination, and sudden dismissal. The literature provides as synthesis of relevant studies in the area of the at will employment law disparities. A review of literature make known potential at will employment law plans, however, the literature retrieve form ProQuest, EBSCO and GALILEO is limited in the five year scope of the at will employment law research.

Traditionally, companies in the United States have possessed the right to terminate their employees at will for any reason, be it good or bad. The Employment-At-Will doctrine encompasses all employees who are not safeguarded by express employment contracts that state that they may be discharged only for good cause. "Good cause" constraints are typically a part of collective bargaining agreements negotiated by employee unions; nonunion workers rarely have this form of protection. The Employment-At-Will

Mary-Kathryn Zachary, JD, (2012) wrote this article because she become conscious of the unjust behavior that some employers impose upon employees, as it relates to the employment at will law. The article

At Will law was situated into place to safeguard both the employee and the employer. By creating the employment at will law; both the employer and employee are able to cancel the contract at any time without consequence. “Employment at-will means that employers are able to terminate ones employment at any time, for any cause - with or without notice”, Rogers, S. 2012.

Employment at will is essentially a rule that strips employees and employers from their rights to due process when it comes to workplace termination. Under this principle employers may let any person go for any reason at any time during their employment with or without just cause. Your stature at the company, time worked, personal conduct; none of those things have to be taken into consideration if you are let go. This means that if an employee does not agree with their grounds for termination, they have no legal right to fight it in a court of law. Employment at will also allows employees to quit their job at any time, again regardless of having just reasoning or not. The only case where an employment at will principle would not apply is if an employee, when hired, signed a document that stipulates other specific terms and conditions regarding grounds for termination/quitting. An important thing to make note of is just as if an employee had signed a contract, they are made aware before being brought on full time, that they are an “at will” employee. These soon to be employees are voluntarily signing that they abide by what is defined in the employment at will principle.

When I think about this scenario a little bit more, I wonder if Odin’s boss left the company if he would expect the “new boss” to uphold the agreement? I would assume, he wouldn’t, because it wasn’t in writing. Why, wouldn’t he want to cover himself in the long run? Also, the reading doesn’t state why he was fired, it said “no apparent reason”, which could be because of the “employment-at-will”, which allows the employer to terminate your employment with or without cause at any time, as long as it doesn’t discriminate or doing it out of retaliation.

Meaning of “at-will” policy: From the point of view of an employment contract, an at-will policy means that the employer can terminate any given employee from the organization at any given point of time, for any reason and it maybe with or without notice. The reason for termination does not matter in case of an at-will policy.

Employment-at-will has been an established segment of common law in the United States, which states that either party to